Types of political ideologies. Ideological crisis

The main types of political ideologies that are defined by science as classical include liberalism, conservatism, and socialism.

As an independent ideological trend, liberalism was formed on the basis of the political philosophy of the English Enlightenment at the end of XVII-XVIII centuries. The term "liberalism" came into wide use in the first half of the 19th century in a number of Western European states and comes from the Latin "free", "related to freedom". That is why all definitions of liberalism include the ideas of personal freedom.

The origins of the liberal worldview date back to the Renaissance. Representatives of the European and American Enlightenment, German classical philosophy, European classical political economy contributed to the formation of a complex of ideas of liberalism.

Since its inception, liberalism has defended a critical attitude towards the state, the principles of political responsibility of citizens, religious tolerance, and humanism. The complex of ideas of classical liberalism includes:

in social sphere: the assertion of the absolute value of the human personality and the equality of all people, the recognition of inalienable human rights to life, freedom, property;

in the economy: recognition of private property, on the basis of which the public economy is based, the demand for the abolition of restrictions and regulations by the state;

in the political sphere: recognition of human rights, separation of legislative and executive powers, recognition of competition.

The main problem of liberal ideology has always been to determine the permissible degree and nature of state intervention in privacy human being, the combination of democracy and freedom.

Attempts to resolve these issues and bring to life the ideas of classical liberalism led to the emergence in the 20th century of the concept of "new liberalism" or "neoliberalism". Neoliberalists are making attempts to reform classical liberalism, changing its form and ideological content. The political program of the neoliberals was based on the ideas of the need for the participation of the masses in the political process, the agreement between the rulers and the ruled. In general, neoliberalism tries to soften some of the extremes in the ideas of liberalism.

In Russia at the end of the 18th century, liberalism was born in constant confrontation and overcoming the traditions of autocracy and serfdom, bureaucratic irresponsibility. It was aimed at recognizing the individual's right to a worthy existence. Russian liberal thought in the period of its appearance was characterized by an anti-democratic tendency. On the verge of the 19th-20th centuries, there was a tendency for the concept of liberalism and democratic ideas to converge. The development of liberal thought in Russia proceeded mainly in line with the study of philosophical and legal issues.

Thus, liberalism at different stages of its development included various components, developed new doctrines. This strengthened his ability to act, attracted supporters, but also made him more controversial and heterogeneous.

The political ideology of liberalism began to meet the requirements for scientific doctrines less and less. There was a weakening of the ideological and political positions of liberalism. Today, liberalism is faced with the need to revise its ideological base, search for new internal trends and modifications.

The next main type of political ideology can be called conservatism. The prerequisite for the emergence of conservatism was the failure of liberalism after the French bourgeois revolution in the 18th century. The term "conservatism" was first used French writer F. Chateaubriand and denoted the ideology of the feudal-aristocratic reaction to bourgeois revolution. The term itself comes from the Latin "preserve, protect."

Conservatism as a political ideology is not only a system of political consciousness that prefers the old system of government to a new one, regardless of its goals and ideological content, but also the principles political participation, attitudes towards the state, personality, social structure.

Ideological and political significance conservatism is difficult to define, because there are a number of reasons for this. First, there is an internal heterogeneity of the political ideology of conservatism. There are two ideological directions in its structure. One of which considers it necessary to maintain the stability of the social structure in its unchanged form. The second is aimed at eradicating the opposition of political forces and proposes the reproduction of the former political forces. Here conservatism appears as a political ideology:

supporting existing orders;

returning to what was lost.

But different areas of conservatism have common characteristics: the recognition of the imperfection of human nature and the existence of a universal moral and religious order, the belief in the inequality of people from birth, the need for a class and social hierarchy. This manifests radicalism, uncharacteristic of conservatism, the desire for forceful methods of resolving conflicts, although conservatism is confident in the ability of politics to alleviate tension between social strata.

The last decades in the world usually distinguish three ideological currents: traditionalist, libertarian and neoconservatism. The latter was formed as a response to the global economic crisis in the 1970s.

Neoconservatism recognizes the need for state intervention in the economy, but assigns a significant role to market mechanisms of regulation. In the political doctrine of neoconservatism there are a number of priority provisions: the subordination of the individual to the state, ensuring the political and spiritual community of the nation. The state of neoconservatives should be based on moral principles, provide the individual with the necessary living conditions on the basis of law and order, while developing institutions civil society maintaining a balance between man and nature. At the same time, there is always a readiness of neoconservatism to use extremely radical means in relations with the enemy.

AT modern Russia conservatism manifests itself in a peculiar way. During the period of domination of liberalism, the term "conservative" was used to refer to opponents from the CPSU. But soon the true meaning was returned to conservatism and it declared itself as a powerful political trend. Today, conservatism retains and increases its influence, not as a political doctrine, but as an intellectual trend.

The third political ideology, conventionally defined as classical, is socialism. The emergence of socialism is connected with the centuries-old desire of the public masses for social justice, social protection of the individual. Traces of dreams are found already in antiquity, play a prominent role in the Middle Ages, and challenge liberalism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

During the period of development of industrial capitalism, which led to the growth of the class of wage workers, it became necessary to express and protect the interests of this class. In this regard, doctrines are emerging that provide for fundamental change the structure of society, the replacement of capitalism by socialism without the exploitation of the masses by the bourgeoisie. With the spread of these ideas among the workers, they began to be called socialist ideas and theories. By the middle of the 19th century, the main directions of socialist ideology had taken shape, and at the end they finally took shape, having a definite program, theoretical justification, and numerous supporters.

Followers believed that socialism is a society whose banner is inscribed "Everything in the name of man, everything for the good of man." This is a society where:

the means of production are in the hands of the people, the oppression of man by man, social oppression, poverty and illiteracy of millions of people are forever finished;

scientific and technological progress does not lead to unemployment, but to a steady increase in the well-being of the people;

secured equal right for labor and its remuneration in accordance with the principle “From each according to his ability to each according to his work”;

national inequality has been eliminated, equality, friendship and brotherhood of all nations have been approved;

the ideas of freedom, human rights, the unity of rights and duties is ensured, there are one laws and norms of morality, one discipline for all, more and more favorable conditions are emerging for the comprehensive development of the individual;

a socialist way of life has developed based on social justice, collectivism and mutual assistance, giving a person confidence in the future.

In general, socialism underestimates and even completely denies the importance of the economic freedom of individuals, competition and unequal remuneration for labor as a prerequisite for growth. material well-being person and society.

Thus, the main advantages in the socialist doctrine are the state, not the individual, politics, not the economy.

To characterize socialism in Russia, the main thing is that socialist ideas were also supported by the practical organization of the matter. This was most widely reflected in "populism" - a stage in the history of Russian socialism. The means of implementing the ideas of "populism" were very diverse - from "going to the people" to "general rebellion" with the aim of seizing power by the people. That is, socialism allowed any tricks political struggle according to the principle: “the end justifies the means”.

Very feature 20th century there were numerous attempts to modernize theoretical basis socialist ideology. But the discrepancy between the ideas of socialism and the tendencies of world development in the 20th century and their obvious inclination towards power methods of management significantly weakened political influence socialist ideology in the modern world.

Ideology is a system of values, attitudes and ideas that reflect people's attitude to politics, to the existing political system and political order, as well as the goals that politicians and society as a whole should strive for. The author of the term is the 19th-century French philosopher A. Destut de Tracy. So he called the doctrine of ideas, allowing you to establish a solid foundation for political life.

Functions of ideology in the state: Orientation: Ideology includes basic ideas about society and the political system, about politics and power, helps a person navigate political life and carry out conscious political actions. Mobilization: Offering society a certain model (idea, program) of a more perfect state (system, regime), ideology thereby mobilizes members of society to bring them to life. Integrative: Ideology seeks to formulate national and nationwide values ​​and goals, offers them to society, uniting people on their basis. Depreciation (mitigating): Explaining and justifying in the eyes of people the existing political system and political reality, ideology thereby contributes to the removal of social tension and the resolution of crisis situations when the state authorities do not have material or organizational opportunities to influence society and citizens.

Classical ideologies of the 19th century. Liberalism Ideological and political trend, where the ideas of freedom are in the first place (first of all, freedom of entrepreneurship, personality, rights and property), human rights and freedoms are protected, a ban on state intervention in the economy. The right of the oppressed to overthrow tyranny and oppression is postulated. D. Locke; Jean-Jacques Rousseau; D. Diderot

Classical ideologies of the 19th century. Conservatism An ideological and political trend that postulates the protection of national and religious traditions, the old foundations of life and denies the possibility of revolutionary changes in society F. Chateaubriand; J. de Maistre

Causes of the crisis classical ideologies 19th century Conservatism Represents the interests of the reactionary strata of society (large landowners, aristocracy, nobility) Liberalism Represents the interests of the capitalist strata of society (bourgeois, capitalists, merchants, etc.) Working classes, proletariat - ?

Ideologies of the 20th century Socialism Social Democracy Neoliberalism A doctrine based on the ideas of social equality and characterized by a negative attitude towards private property A doctrine based on the ideas of social justice and the redistribution of citizens' incomes A doctrine based on the ideas of liberalism of the 19th century. Government intervention in the economy

Ideologies of the 20th century Socialism A doctrine based on the ideas of social equality and characterized by a negative attitude towards private property. Originated in the middle of the 18th century. developed in the 19th century. in Europe as a reaction to the intensification of capitalist exploitation. A. Saint-Simon; C. Fourier; R. Owen; K. Marx; F. Engels

Ideologies of the 20th century Neoliberalism A doctrine based on the ideas of liberalism of the 19th century. State intervention in the economy is introduced. Occurs in the 30s. as a reaction to the global crisis of the first half of the 20th century. J. M. Keynes In Russia in the 1990s E. Gaidar conducted economic policy radical neoliberalism, the so-called. "Shock therapy"

Ideologies of the 20th century Social Democracy A doctrine based on the ideas of social justice and the redistribution of citizens' incomes. Recognizing private property in the economy attached importance other forms of ownership (nationalized, municipal, cooperative) The principle of "social partnership" and "class cooperation" is proclaimed.

GENERAL HISTORY.XXin.

From New to recent history: ways of development of industrial society

The main directions of scientific and technological progress: from the technical revolution of the late XIX century. to the scientific and technological revolution of the twentieth century. Monopoly capitalism and the contradictions of its development. The transition to a mixed economy in the middle of the twentieth century. "Welfare State". Changing the social structure of industrial society. "Consumer society" and the causes of its crisis in the late 1960s.

The crisis of classical ideologies at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. and search for new models of social development. Formation of a social legal state. Changing the principles of constitutional construction. Democratization of social and political life. Prerequisites for the systemic (economic, socio-psychological, ideological) crisis of the industrial society at the turn of the 1960s - 1970s.

Discussion about the historical nature of totalitarianism and authoritarianism of modern times.Marginalization of society in the context of accelerated modernization. Political ideology of a totalitarian type. Fascism. National Socialism. Features of state-corporate (fascist) and partocratic totalitarian regimes, their policies in the field of state-legal construction, social and economic relations, culture.

Formation and development of the world system of socialism. Totalitarian and authoritarian features of "real socialism". Attempts to democratize the socialist system.

The main stages in the development of the system of international relations in the last third of the 19th - the middle of the 20th centuries. World wars in the history of mankind: economic, political, socio-psychological and demographic causes and consequences. The formation of the international legal system. League of Nations and the United Nations. Deployment of integration processes in Europe. "Bipolar" model of international relations during the "cold war".

Spiritual culture in the period of modern history. Formation of a non-classical scientific picture of the world. Modernism is a change in the ideological and aesthetic foundations of artistic creativity. Realism in the art of the twentieth century. counterculture phenomenon. The growth of technocracy and irrationalism in the mass consciousness.

Humanity at the stage of transition to the information society

Discussion about the post-industrial stage of social development. Information revolution at the end of the 20th century. The formation of the information society. Property, labor and creativity in the information society.

Globalization of social development on turn XX-XXI centuries Internationalization of the economy and the formation of a single information space. Features of modern socio-economic processes in the countries of the West and East. The Problem of the "World South".

The system of international relations at the turn of the XX-XXI centuries. The collapse of the "bipolar" model of international relations and becoming new structure world order.Integration and disintegration processes in the world after the end of the Cold War. European Union. The crisis of the international legal system and the problem of national sovereignty.Local conflicts in the modern world.

Features of the development of political ideology and representative democracy at the turn of the XX-XXI centuries. The role of political technologies in the information society. Worldview foundations of the "neo-conservative revolution". Modern social democratic and liberal ideology. Attempts to form the ideology of the "third way". Antiglobalism. Religion and church in modern public life.

Features of the spiritual life of modern society. Changes in the scientific picture of the world.

Ideology

Crisis and the end of the era of ideologies

The peculiarity of today's crisis is global confusion. People feel insecure all over the world. Nobody understands what is the right thing to do. At the same time, nothing really terrible and irreparable happened, at least not yet. But in the air there seems to be a feeling of slowly but inevitably impending formidable events. As one ironic blogger on LiveJournal noted, “Before spitting it out, God chews us slowly, like chewing gum.”

Something similar happened just before the collapse Soviet Union. Already a year and a half before the August coup (or the unsuccessful August attempt at counter-revolution) and the Belavezha agreements, it became clear that the country would soon become completely different. The collapse of the USSR, the painful demolition of the former way of life and shock reforms were also approaching slowly, without haste, as they say, "with a delay."

However, what does the current slow, protracted pace of the crisis really mean? Maybe, in fact, everything is not so bad, and they only frighten us in vain, as they say, specially “nightmares”? This is the task of the media - they constantly need a sensation. What could be more understandable for the press than to produce apocalyptic forecasts stretched out over many months? But they will constantly keep the audience in suspense and every time they will be perceived as a sensation. The semi-hysterical attention of the public is guaranteed. And there, you see, everything will be forgotten: a terrible dream, but God is merciful.

Today's Russia is not an ideological country

Indeed, it is not given to us to predict how current events will turn out. You can't know your future history. Maybe everything will work out. However, in today's situation, the readiness with which bad news began to be met with is surprising. Confusion is everywhere, but perhaps nowhere is there such a mood that all this is not accidental. It is as if here, in Russia, people deep down, long before the officially declared crisis, were ready for a global, total disruption.

This is due to the fact that with the fall of the Soviet Union, we no longer had an ideological project that would be common to all. For some, the social ideal was liberal democracy, for some Soviet socialism, for some the Byzantine Empire, but there was no decisive general agreement on this issue. This was the reason for Putin's defensive policy, mainly of a tactical nature, aimed at holding and stabilizing. Today's Russia is not an ideological country. The feeling of deep uncertainty was in no small measure due to the absence of a clear plan “how we should equip Russia”, with which the decisive majority of society would agree. Hence the uncertainty - from the uncertainty with the answer to the question, in what country and in what world do we live?

Today's crisis is a crisis of ideology as such

Now, suddenly, a deep sense of insecurity and uncertainty was not unique to us. After all, if we compare the deadly Soviet crisis twenty years ago and the current crisis, already worldwide, that's what you can see. Then, having lost faith in the communist ideology, they wanted capitalism. Confidence in the "beautiful far away" was based on the fact that there was a ready-made "assembly model" at hand - a liberal democratic ideology. There was also a clear example that everything would be fine - the West. There, with their brains and hands, people created a “normal” life for themselves, finally settled securely and comfortably on Earth, unlike us, unfortunate. Therefore, that crisis took place in some kind of ecstasy, intoxicating fever. In Germany, they happily demolished the Berlin Wall, erasing the border between East and West, and we were happy about that too. Music background radical change was Beethoven's "Ode to Joy" to the words of Schiller: "Hug, millions!"

Today, greetings to the impending thunderstorm are not heard at all. This time, there is neither a ready-made ideological model for assembly, nor case study where they know and know how to do it right. The system of the Western way and the device of life as a whole failed. Not only the model of financial capitalism has been called into question, but also the associated liberal-democratic ideology. It turns out that it also does not guarantee a reliable existence on Earth.

However, the peculiarity of the “current moment” is that democratic liberalism is not being replaced by any other ideology that could act as an alternative to it on a global scale. After all, an ideology is only an ideology when its claims are of a universal nature, when it claims to the whole world, to the fact that only on its basis it is possible to securely settle down on Earth. Thus, the question arises: does not the current crisis, the associated crisis of the liberal model and the absence of an alternative model, mean the beginning of the end of the new European era of ideologies in general?

What is ideology

The term "ideology" was introduced by the French philosopher and economist A.L.K. Destut de Tracy's early XIX centuries to designate the doctrine of ideas, which will establish a solid foundation for politics and ethics. Ideology as such is a new European phenomenon associated with an attempt to emancipate a person from religion into the New and Newest time. Its essence is that ideology claims to understand the logic of history, to penetrate into this logic and to possess knowledge of how things should be arranged. human society. Ideology is built by rational means, appeals to rational knowledge and proposes projects of one type or another. social structure, which humanity must implement in real life on its own. Therefore, ideology is an attempt by a person to securely settle down on Earth only based on own forces and mind. In this sense, the concept of “Christian ideology” is no less an oxymoron than wooden iron. Naturally, I do not want to say that there cannot be societies where Christianity or another religion will be the dominant form of social consciousness. But Christianity is non-ideological and non-political. It focuses not on earthly self-disposition, but rather on the rejection of it in the hope of God's help.

At the same time, the current calls to urgently create a new “fourth theory” do not really lead to anything. They only emphasize the current lack of "theory" as such and the confusion of a person before the question of what to do now.

To this we can add that it is no coincidence that the degeneration of politics is now observed. Current presenters politicians look unimportant. So Venezuelan Hugo Chavez or Bolivian President Evo Morales are rather a parody of the Cuban revolutionaries of forty years ago, and, for example, Nicolas Sarkozy is a parody of de Gaulle. Disappointment in politics and disillusionment in ideologies are interrelated phenomena: it turns out that they cannot deliver what they promise. And accordingly, on the political scene, which in many respects is already considered a sphere of rivalry and struggle of ideologies only by inertia, semi-parodic figures turn out to be the leading figures. One has only to look at the previous US president or the current president. These are, let's say, not the Roosevelts, not geniuses. For example, when looking at B. Obama, there is a strong suspicion that he really can’t do anything and decides nothing, but is a purely image project.

Three main ideologies

Liberalism, communism, and fascism are the three major dominant political theories that, as the French conservative Alain de Benoist writes, spawned many intermediate ideological currents in the 20th century (1).

He notes that “theories that appeared later disappeared earlier than others. Fascism, having appeared later than all, died faster than all the others. Then communism. Liberalism, the oldest of these three theories, is the last to disappear” (2).
Of these three main ideologies, liberalism is the least expansionist. Unlike communism, it leaves a certain space of freedom for religion. In liberalism, as an ideological frame of mind, there is generally some confidence in the givens of life. As Friedrich Hayek wrote, “Having traced the cumulative effect of individual action, we find that many of the institutions on which human achievement is based have arisen and function without the participation of an inventive and directing mind; that, in the words of Adam Ferguson, "nations stumble over institutions that are really the result of human action, not human intention" (3).

At the same time, one of the defining features of liberalism lies in the rather anthropological area - this is the understanding of man as a self-sufficient autonomous being, filled with " nervous feeling dignity,” in the words of our Konstantin Leontiev. Communism is a bet on the collective "we", which for the philosophy of communism is the true foundation and focus of being. Liberalism, on the other hand, is a stake on the individual "I" as its own master. Who is more effective in mastering the world - the individual liberated "I" or the collective, united "we" - this is one of the central points of disagreement between communism and liberalism.

The deadly crisis of the ideology of communism and the communist system happened 20 years ago. The collective “we” lost the battle to the individual “I” claiming autonomy, because the structure of life based on the latter was both more flexible and at the same time more in line with inner human vanity and pride. If under communism I personally still have to humble myself before the party and the state, meet their strict, draconian norms, then under modern capitalism I can lead almost any way of life. However, it seems that Babylon did not last very long.

True, even if we are right in our forecast of the coming change of epochs, it is clear that it will not happen all at once. The past does not always go away immediately, it seems to disappear or crumble in parts. Do not wait for what awaits us tomorrow new world. The future will win its place gradually, and the past will resist and cling to life for a long time to come. So, for a long time and gradually left, antiquity surrendered the battlefield, and then, almost a thousand years later, the Middle Ages.

Crisis is Judgment

The word "crisis" comes from antiquity. In ancient Greek it means "judgment". If the crisis is understood as a judgment on presumptuous humanity, then it is absurd to count on, as they say, “settlement of the crisis”, on a successful “fight against the crisis”. The defendant is not able to fight the court, at least on an equal footing. The trial ends with a verdict. Only in this sense can a court case be “settled”. And escape is also excluded. In the sphere of being, as M. Bakhtin noted, there can be no alibi.

The final verdict of the current court-crisis has not yet been announced, as well as the punishment. But on today's example of almost panicky perception of even the initial stage of future highly probable upheavals, we can conclude that it will not work for a person to settle down firmly on Earth, it is impossible. The person himself knows this in the very depths of his soul, otherwise the current mass panic moods would not exist. The “end of history” proclaimed twenty years ago by F. Fukuyama and the irreversible victory of the liberal ideology are just as unrealizable as the bright communist future.

As for Russia as a non-ideological country, here one can, oddly enough, try to extract strength from weakness. What seemed like an obvious disadvantage just recently may, paradoxically, turn into an advantage. With the end of ideologies, our lack of a dominant ideology gives us a greater degree of freedom than Western countries. We are not tied to any project, which means we have a wider horizon of vision, and therefore more possibilities for action.

In addition, we may not have had time to get used to the material prosperity that Western civilization organized for a historically relatively short time, and which we have been trying to arrange for ourselves for a very short time. Never before has mankind, at least a significant part of it, lived as well off as in the second half of the 20th century. But did someone give a 100% guarantee that it would last forever? As for us, then, as Vasily Shukshin said with some anguish and at the same time with humility, “we never lived well, it’s not a damn thing to start.”

It does not matter to live in the material plane - this is only for the better in the sense that this state of affairs continues to prolong history. In Christian theology, the last times are unequivocally associated with the times of universal material well-being. A person of this era is much less capable of both creativity and self-sacrifice.

However, the departure from the principle of ideology as an attempt at active self-organization on Earth does not necessarily mean a rejection of activity in general. A merchant can be extremely active in his own way, an officer in his own way, a monk in his own way. The question is what active activity is aimed at: is it an attempt at self-satisfied self-organization and self-exaltation, or is it following values ​​higher than earthly guidelines.

2 Ibid. S. 28.

3 Hayek F. True and false individualism // About freedom. Anthology of world liberal thought (first half of the 20th century). M., 2000. S. 389-390.

The second half of the nineteenth century in the development of natural science takes special place. This is a period that simultaneously represents the completion of the old, classical natural science and the birth of a new, non-classical one. On the one hand, great scientific achievement, laid down by the genius of Newton - classical mechanics - at this time gets the opportunity to fully deploy its potential. And, on the other hand, in the depths of classical natural science, the prerequisites for a new scientific revolution are already ripening; mechanistic (metaphysical) methodology is completely insufficient to explain the complex objects that came to the attention of science in the second half of the nineteenth century. The leader of natural science is still physics.

1. Crisis in physics at the turn of the century

Second half of the 19th century characterized by the rapid development of all previously established and the emergence of new branches of physics. However, the theory of heat and electrodynamics are developing especially rapidly. The theory of heat develops in two directions. Firstly, this is the development of thermodynamics, which is directly related to heat engineering. Second, development kinetic theory gases and heat, which led to the emergence of a new branch of physics - statistical physics. As far as electrodynamics is concerned, here major events were: the creation of a theory electro magnetic field and the emergence of a new branch of physics - the theory of electrons.

The greatest achievement of physics in the second half of the nineteenth century is the creation of the theory of the electromagnetic field. By the middle of the XIX century. in those branches of physics where electrical and magnetic phenomena were studied, rich empirical material was accumulated, and a number of important regularities were formulated. Thus, the most important laws were discovered: Coulomb's law, Ampère's law, law electromagnetic induction, the laws of direct current, etc. The situation with theoretical concepts was more complicated. The theoretical schemes built by physicists were based on the ideas of long-range action and the corpuscular nature of electricity. There was no complete theoretical unity in the views of physicists on electrical and magnetic phenomena. However, by the middle of the XIX century. the need for a qualitative improvement in the theoretical basis of the teachings on electrical and magnetic processes became quite obvious. There are separate attempts to create unified theory electrical and magnetic phenomena. One of them turned out to be successful. It was Maxwell's theory that made a real revolution in physics.

Maxwell set himself the task of translating Faraday's ideas and views into a rigorous mathematical language, or, in other words, interpreting the known laws of electrical and magnetic phenomena from the point of view of Faraday's views. Being a brilliant theoretician and masterfully mastering the mathematical apparatus, J.K. Maxwell coped with this most difficult task. The result of his work was the construction of the theory of the electromagnetic field, which was set out in the work "Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field", published in 1864.

This theory significantly changed the ideas about the pattern of electrical and magnetic phenomena. She brought them together. The main provisions and conclusions of this theory are as follows.

· The electromagnetic field is real and exists regardless of whether there are conductors and magnetic poles that detect it or not. Maxwell defined this field as follows: “... an electromagnetic field is that part of space that contains and surrounds bodies that are in an electric or magnetic state” (Maxwell J.K. Selected Works on the Theory of the Electromagnetic Field. M. , 1952, p. 253).

A change in the electric field leads to the appearance of a magnetic field, and vice versa.

· The voltage vectors of the electric and magnetic fields are perpendicular. This explained why electromagnetic wave exclusively transverse.

· The theory of the electromagnetic field proceeded from the fact that the transfer of energy occurs at a finite speed. And thus she justified proximity principle.

· Transmission speed electromagnetic oscillations equal to the speed of light (c). From this followed fundamental identity of electromagnetic and optical phenomena. It turned out that the differences between them are only in the frequency of oscillations of the electromagnetic field.

Experimental confirmation of Maxwell's theory in 1887 in the experiments of G. Hertz (1857-1894) made a great impression on physicists. And since that time, Maxwell's theory has been recognized by the overwhelming majority of scientists.

In the second half of the 19th century, attempts were made to give the concept of absolute space and absolute frame of reference a new scientific content, clearing them of the metaphysical meaning that Newton gave them. In 1870, K. Neumann introduced the concept of an a-body, as such a body in the Universe, which is motionless and which can be considered as the origin of the absolute reference system. Some physicists proposed to take for an a-body such a body that coincides with the center of gravity of all bodies in the entire Universe, believing that this center of gravity can be considered to be at absolute rest.

A set of questions about absolute space and absolute movement acquired a new meaning in connection with the development of the electronic theory and the emergence of a hypothesis about the electromagnetic nature of matter. According to the electronic theory, there is an ether immobile everywhere and charges moving in it. The motionless ether fills all space and it is possible to associate with it a frame of reference, which is inertial and, moreover, selected from all inertial frames of reference. The motion relative to the ether can be considered as absolute. Thus, Newton's absolute space was replaced by the motionless ether, which can be considered as a kind of absolute and, moreover, inertial frame of reference.

However, this point of view experienced fundamental difficulties from the very beginning. It is possible to speak and imagine about the absolute motion of a body, i.e., motion relative to the ether, but it is impossible to determine this motion. A number of experiments (by Michelson and others) set up to detect such a movement gave negative results. Thus, although the absolute frame of reference was, as it seemed, found, nevertheless, like Newton's absolute space, it turned out to be unobservable. Lorentz, in order to explain the results obtained in these experiments, was forced to introduce special hypotheses, from which it followed that, despite the existence of the ether, it is impossible to determine the movement relative to it.

However, contrary to such opinions, more and more often, considerations were expressed that the very concept of absolute rectilinear and uniform motion as motion relative to some absolute space is devoid of any scientific content. At the same time, the concept of an absolute frame of reference is also deprived of content and a more general concept is introduced inertial frame of reference, not related to the concept of absolute space. As a result, the concept of an absolute coordinate system becomes meaningless. In other words, all systems associated with free bodies, not under the influence of any other bodies, are equal .

In 1886, L. Lange, conducting historical analysis development of mechanics, and asserting the meaninglessness of the concept of absolute space, proposed the definition of an inertial coordinate system: inertial systems are systems that move rectilinearly and uniformly with respect to each other. The transition from one inertial frame to another is carried out in accordance with Galileo's transformations.

Galileo's transformations were taken for granted for centuries and did not need any justification. But time has shown that this is far from the case.

At the end of the XIX century. the German physicist, positivist E. Mach, sharply criticized the Newtonian concept of absolute space. Mach's views as a physicist were based on the conviction that “motion can be uniform with respect to another motion. The question of whether the motion itself is uniform does not make any sense.” (Mach E. Mechanics. Historical-critical sketch of its development. St. Petersburg, 1909, p. 187 In this regard, Mach considered the systems of Ptolemy and Copernicus as equal, considering the latter more preferable because of its simplicity.) He transfers this idea not only to speed, but also for acceleration. In Newtonian mechanics, acceleration (as opposed to velocity) was treated as an absolute value. According to classical mechanics, in order to judge the acceleration, it is sufficient for the body itself experiencing accelerations. In other words, acceleration is an absolute quantity and can be considered relative to absolute space, and not relative to other bodies. (Newton argued this position with an example with a rotating bucket in which water is poured. This experience showed that relative motion water in relation to the bucket does not cause centrifugal forces and we can talk about its rotation by itself, regardless of other bodies, i.e. only the relation to absolute space remains.) This conclusion was challenged by Mach.

From Mach's point of view, any movement relative to space has no meaning. According to Mach, one can speak of motion only in relation to bodies. Therefore, all quantities that determine the state of motion are relative. Hence, acceleration is also a purely relative quantity. Moreover, experience can never give information about absolute space. He accused Newton of departing from the principle that only those quantities that are directly derived from experience should be introduced into the theory.

However, despite the idealistic approach to the problem of the relativity of motion, Mach's considerations contained some interesting ideas, which contributed to the emergence general theory relativity. We are talking about the so-called. "Mach principle". Mach put forward the idea that inertial forces should be considered as the action of the total mass of the universe. This principle subsequently had a significant impact on A. Einstein. The rational grain of the “Mach principle” was that the properties of space-time are due to gravitating matter. But Mach did not know in what concrete form this conditionality was expressed.